Increase in consumerism in the past decades has seen a corresponding increase in product counterfeiting activities. To certify that certain products are genuine, it has been proposed to affix each product with a physical tag before the products leave factory. These tags are not removable except by using special de-tagging devices. Furthermore, each tag is uniquely identifiable. Since such tags cannot be counterfeited or removed from the products easily, products affixed with such tags may be presumed authentic. These tags may be laser tags or anti-counterfeiting rings and each contain an authentication code which provides unique identity.
A tag is identifiable by electronically reading or scanning an authentication code contained within it and sending the code via an automatic telephone voice system or the Internet to a server for authentication. If the server recognizes the authentication code the server will affirm the authenticity of the tag. In this way, the product to which a tag is affixed is presumed genuine.
Such tags have been applied even onto live produce such as the popular hairy crabs in Chinese communities.
In order to prevent theft of the authentication code contained within the tags, each tag is designed such that it will be irreparably broken if an attempt is made to open the tag. A broken tag will indicate that someone has attempted to change or tamper with the tag, causing the consumer to be suspicious of the authenticity of the product affixed with the broken tag.
To further improve security, every attempt to check the authenticity of a tag is recorded in the server. If there are counterfeit copies of a piece of authentication code, there will be a record of more attempts at authenticating the same tag at the server than has been actually made by the owner(s) of the product. In other words, if there were an unexpectedly greater number of attempts at authenticating the same tag, it would imply that the tag is not unique and there is a counterfeit of the tag somewhere. This would alert the owner that the product affixed with a tag containing the same authentication code may be counterfeit. However, in the event that there is a counterfeit tag, the first person to make an enquiry to authenticate the tag will have no idea that the counterfeit tag exists. Only the person who is making at least the second attempt to authenticate the tag may be able to detect that an earlier authentication attempt has been made which he has not made, betraying the existence of the counterfeit tag.
CN201210288489.8, entitled “Multifunctional Product Anti-counterfeiting Identifying System and Anti-counterfeiting Identifying Method Thereof”, described a version of this prior art which uses a single tracking tag which actually comprises both a printed barcode and an electronic tag. Information about the product to which the tag is affixed is stored in the server, along with a record of all query attempts in verifying the tag. The shortcoming of this method is that a single tracking tag is used for obtaining information on the product and on the movements of the product. However, there is no privacy relating to the information in the tag. This allows a counterfeit tag to be made and released to the market even before the original tag is released.
CN201310546388.0, entitled “Anti-counterfeiting Tag System”, discloses a method which uses two product tracking codes at once, such that authentication of a tag can be carried out even when one of the tracking codes cannot be used.
US2014/0095398 entitled “Double ID Anti-counterfeiting Method and System”, discloses using two kinds of anti-counterfeiting codes for preventing counterfeiting of a tag. A first anti-counterfeiting code is a retailer's code and a second anti-counterfeiting code is a product code. Both codes must be provided to an authentication server in order that the server may authenticate the tag. The disadvantage with this method is that the retailer must have already been determined before the product leaves the factory, which limits freedom of choice of retailer severely.
None of these methods is able to effectively prevent theft of the authentication code in a tag. Furthermore, none of these methods effectively addresses the confusion which may arise when a tag is checked many times at the server for authenticity. Therefore, it is desirable to provide an improved method and an accompanying system or device to provide a possibility of mitigating these problems.